Deep learning models for webcam eye tracking in online experiments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eye tracking is prevalent in scientific and commercial applications. Recent computer vision and deep learning methods enable eye tracking with off-the-shelf webcams and reduce dependence on expensive, restrictive hardware. However, such deep learning methods have not yet been applied and evaluated for remote, online psychological experiments. In this study, we tackle critical challenges faced in remote eye tracking setups and systematically evaluate appearance-based deep learning methods of gaze tracking and blink detection. From their own homes and laptops, 65 participants performed a battery of eye tracking tasks including (i) fixation, (ii) zone classification, (iii) free viewing, (iv) smooth pursuit, and (v) blink detection. Webcam recordings of the participants performing these tasks were processed offline through appearance-based models of gaze and blink detection. The task battery required different eye movements that characterized gaze and blink prediction accuracy over a comprehensive list of measures. We find the best gaze accuracy to be 2.4° and precision of 0.47°, which outperforms previous online eye tracking studies and reduces the gap between laboratory-based and online eye tracking performance. We release the experiment template, recorded data, and analysis code with the motivation to escalate affordable, accessible, and scalable eye tracking that has the potential to accelerate research in the fields of psychological science, cognitive neuroscience, user experience design, and human-computer interfaces.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".